by W.B. Howard (Editor Despatch)
THE ENVIRONMENTAL MOVEMENT
WHAT ABOUT THE TERROR OF GLOBAL WARMING?
WHAT ABOUT THE SHOCK/HORROR "HOLE IN THE OZONE LAYER"?
WHAT ABOUT THOSE DESTRUCTIVE (chlorofluorocarbons)CFCs?
A FALSE VIEW.
WE HAVE BEEN SOLD A BILL OF GOODS! ABOUT A MOUNTAIN OF ECOLOGY MATTERS!
THE RELIGIOUS BELIEFS OF THE ENVIRONMENTALISTS
ARE YOU AND YOUR FAMILY EXPENDABLE? .
MORE ON THE MONTREAL PROTOCOL
ASTONISHING ABSURDITIES ABOUT A "LOST" DOCUMENT!
JAMES LOVELOCK AND THE GAIA HYPOTHESIS
THE HORRORS OF THE "SAVE THE EARTH" BOOK IN AUSTRALIAN
MORE ABOUT THE POPULATION OF THE EARTH.
POPULATION AND ECOLOGY
NATURE WORSHIP AND THE GLOBE
WHAT IS THE GODLESS WORLD SEEKING
THE NEW PARADIGM
A TRANSFORMATIVE CATECHISM (from Tranet):
THE PHYSICAL UNIVERSE IS GOD - THIS IS ENVIRONMENTALISM.
A QUICK LOOK AT THE MYSTERY BABYLONIAN HIERARCHY OF RELIGION
THE "CHRISTIAN" ORGANIZATIONS AND THE ENVIRONMENT...A COMPROMISE
LIVING TODAY IN GOD'S ENVIRONMENT - AT HOME IN HIM.
THE ENVIRONMENTAL MOVEMENT.
How could two lizards cost Australian taxpayers $650,000 in fees, new site
plans and surveys? Yet this did happen, as reported in The Advertiser,
Adelaide, and the Reader's Digest, April, 1996. Another outrageous intrusion
by the environmental movement. What went on to bring about this absurdity?
The Australian Geological Survey Organization submitted a proposal for
a headquarters in February 1995,a $105-million project. However the Australian
Capital Territory Department of Environment and Land Planning discovered
that two earless dragons were on the site. These were rather rare, and
little was known of the species, and so the department would not issue
an environmental clearance.
$84,000 has been set aside to give a management plan for the dragons,
just in case others turn up, or perhaps another rare lizard enters the
scene on a new site - 300 metres away.
Commented Senator Paul Calvert, describing the situation as bureaucracy
"run amok", "most people would not believe that such a situation could
arise. The facts of this case show the Canberra bureaucracy is capable
of anything, as long as the long-suffering taxpayer is the one to pick
up the tab."
Crazy! It couldn't be true! Yes, it can and is. We are living in the
age of the "environmental disaster" hysteria, the "save the earth" scam,
and the "animalism are equal with humans" paganistic global-mind. It is
not at all uncommon to have laws passed which bring severe suffering to
humans - just to satisfy some outrageous demand of one of the "ecology"
groups which have mushroomed across Australia and the world.
The environmental saviours are a pain in the neck, but are there more
sinister reasons to oppose their extremist views than those which first
meet the eye? Aren't they just nature lovers who have gotten a little fanatical?
"Hippies" with a too romantic, not very practical, attachment to furry
creatures, rain forests and lizards?
The New Age phenomenon known as "saving the ecology of earth" is a complex,
nasty business which few citizens of the earth understand. In this brief
warning, only the smallest part of the politics and religious beliefs of
the environmental movement can be touched upon, there is much, much more!
World, we face suffering, privation, starvation, imprisonment and death
from the New Age eco-terrorists! It is high time we realised what is occurring.
THIS DOCUMENT IS A WARNING! AN ALARM BELL!
The kind of questions people need to ask are stated below. We hope to provide
the answers, which should enlighten the reader to the vast perils of the
1. What are the ecological, scientific truths? Are these diametrically
opposed to the dogmas of environmentalism?
2.Who are the leaders, and what are the political aims of environmentalism?
What is happening in Australia?
3. What is the weird religious foundation of the environmental movement?
4. What are you and I facing, how will all this change our lives?
THE ECOLOGICAL TRUTHS VERSUS ENVIRONMENTALISM.
Let's ask these important questions:
Is there really danger from the "hole in the ozone layer"?
Answer - NO! Could there be a "greenhouse effect" which will
cause disaster to the planet? Answer - NO! Are CFCs the main culprit
which is causing the "hole in the ozone layer"? Answer - NO! Is
it therefore practical and sensible to completely ban CFCs? Answer -
OZONE LAYER HOLE - THE FAIRY STORY.
Once upon a time clever men, with vested interests and a whole planet and
its wealth to gain, cried: "there is a giant hole in the sky, and we must
force the masses to live like peasants, doing without proper refrigeration
and air-conditioning in order to save the world and all its life." Did
the inhabitants of earth believe this myth? Yes they did, and insisted
that the necessities that kept them alive and well-fed be destroyed. Why?
Because of the fear that the clever men engendered about the giant hole,
and how the planet was beginning to cook. Why would anyone want to cause
such a scare on the planet if it is not true? There are a number of reasons,
this is not a simple situation that has arisen. The whole "ozone" "greenhouse"
business has almost a supernatural quality about it, have you noticed?
When in history has any promotion of anything at all ever gone so well!
The entire global community has caught the "save the earth" message, what
an amazing effort of net-working, propaganda and teaching has gone into
this greatest of all the ages advertising campaign. You need proofs about
the environmental movement being a scam? By the end of this booklet you
will have some of them.
THE LEADERS AND POLITICS OF ENVIRONMENTALISM.
There is a New World Order which desires to see a One World union, and
the "save the earth" campaign is a wonderful weapon for the Plan. People
are uniting and demanding that "something be done" in this "crisis" or
we will all perish. The world needs a government and a ruler, or we will
destroy the atmosphere - so "they" say. Some of the lesser mortals have
swallowed the hook, and are being pulled "every which way" by the clever
men. These lesser mortals have made names for themselves, have fortunes
tied up in the "save the earth" environmentalism. They head up groups,
work tirelessly, they now have deaf ears if any words of common sense are
directed at them. They will not allow any contradiction about the "ozone
hole" - although, as will be shown shortly, there is no scientific proof
which justifies the "ozone hole" hysteria, or the other catastrophes either.
Including the so-called "population explosion". Many sincere, trusting,
naive folk are working to "save the earth" simply out of concern for the
earth as their home, and their childrens' home. They have come to see this
as top priority, and anyone who says otherwise is seen as a potential killer
of the inhabitants of the planet. They believe implicitly in the New Age
hype. They have heard and seen about it again and again in magazines, newspapers,
on television, at colleges, schools, on the radio, on computer models,
and countless other ways of communication. They are hooked, and the struggle
is over. They are emotionally, passionately involved in "saving Mother
THE IRON MOUNTAIN REPORT.
In August 1963, fifteen experts in differing fields, social science, history,
economics, international law, cultural anthropology, psychology, psychiatry,
mathematics, astronomy, and some others had a secret meeting at Iron Mountain,
New York. They were highly influential men with global power. This "Iron
Mountain" is a network of offices and vaults near Hudson, for corporations
in case nuclear war breaks out. Over the next two years the group met many
times, in various areas of the United States. The group concluded that
war was stabilizing, and brought unity to the masses, that it was necessary.
They concluded that peace destabilized nations. It was decided that war
was too "wasteful" however, and that other methods should be deliberately
set in motion to bring global unity, control and "stability". What could
they replace war with was the question. They reviewed as possible replacements
"a comprehensive social-welfare program...a giant open-end space research
program, aimed at unreachable targets... an omnipresent, virtually omnipotent
international police force, an established and recognized extraterrestrial
menace, massive global environmental pollution, fictitious alternate enemies...
new religions or other mythologies, and others." (Leonard Lewin, Foreword,
Report from Iron Mountain on the Possibility and Desirability of Peace.
(New York: Dial, 1967; also see Esquire, December 1967; New York: Dell,
1967; Hammondsworth: Penquin, 1968; and London: Macdonald, 1968) Good report
on Iron Mountain is found in the Spiritual Counterfeits Project Journal
17, no 3:40-56, 992.) The Iron Mountain Report is NOT FICTION. U.S. News
and World report called it the "book that shook the White House". "Could
it be that the entire eco-catastrophe and fear-mongering campaign has been
a gigantic hoax - a hoax perpetrated on the world for a small group of
so-called superhumans who are called by theosophists the "Brotherhood of
the Masters"; a hoax invented so that its perpetrators can gain global
control and implement the new world order and a universal religion keyed
on Theosophy?" (Michael S. Coffman. "Saviours of the Earth?", p.211). Coffman
goes on to show that that is indeed the scenario. Four years after the
publication of the Iron Mountain Report, the Council of Foreign Affairs,
under the directorship of David Rockefeller, announced dramatically that
the eco-crisis was a threat to the earth! This actually began the modern
version of the environmental movement, with its present form of political
clout and eco-extremism. Rockefeller, and the foundations which he has
the most influence over, gave massive funding to the environmental organizations.
The Theosophical Society, with its off-shoot Lucis Trust, have vastly influenced
the environmental movement. First called Lucifer Trust Publishing by Alice
Bailey, this occult organization has untold control now over the UN, and
have used the peace movement and the environmental movement as tools of
change. The Lucis Trust and Theosophical aim is to change Western civilization
back to a Babylonian religious society. David Rockefeller is a member of
Lucis Trust. Past and present members of this astonishing religious organization
are Henry Kissinger, Robert McNamara, and George Shultz. To the Theosophist
nature is sacred, the "Mother Earth" is a living entity, and "god" is all
creation, including man himself.
MORE TRUTHS ABOUT THE ENVIRONMENT. WHAT ARE THE SCIENTIFIC FACTS ABOUT
From the pen of Michael S. Coffman (Ph.D., university if Idaho;M.S., Biology,
Northern Arizona University [NAU]; B.S., Forestry, NAU. He is an environmental
consultant working with Environmental Perspectives,Inc. From the book "Saviours
of the Earth?", pp. 46-47:
"THE DANGERS OF EMOTIONAL HYPE.
These issues are extremely complex - too complex for simple solutions based
on emotional hype. Yet, that is exactly what we are hearing from environmental
leaders and a small minority of scientists. We came dangerously close to
signing extremely costly treaties at the 1992 Earth Summit at Rio de Janeiro.
(Which was headed, by the way, by New Ager MauriceStrong). During the Earth
Summit we were barraged with the 'fact' that global warming was proven
by science. At best that image was a gross distortion of reality. At worse,
it was a lie. What few realized was that the so-called fact was based upon
a falsified summary of a scientific report on global warming published
in 1990. This summary, reproduced by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate
Change (IPCC), was the centerpiece of the global warming call-to-action
at the Earth Summit. The primary report, the Scientific Assessment of Climate
Change, was the result of a meeting of nearly 200 climatologists, scientists,
bureaucrats, and administrators from around the world. It basically outlined
the uncertainties noted above. But when the IPCC produced the document
of this meeting, the uncertainties outlined by the scientists were minimized
by the one to three carefully chosen people who wrote each chapter. The
uncertainties disappeared entirely in the executive summary. Instead of
uncertainty, the summary concluded that the greenhouse effect 'poses a
SIGNIFICANT environmental threat'. According to Christopher Folland, assistant
to Sir John Houghton of the United Kingdom Meteorlogical Office who wrote
the summary, the summary would have had no value to policymakers if it
were punctuated by repeated cautions and 'on the other hand' statements.
Since its release, the summary has been presented to political leaders
and the public as an 'authoritative statement of the international scientific
community.' BUT IT WAS A FRAUD." (Emphasis added). (End of quote - parenthesis
FORTY EIGHT SCIENTISTS ARE ENRAGED!
Well, you might say, if it was a fraudulent summary, why didn't responsible
scientists refute it, publically, furiously, using the media, warning world
leaders? They DID, dear friends, they DID! But there is a "stacked deck"
against the truth being leaked to you and I. Dr Coffman goes on with these
shocking words: "Enraged, forty-eight American scientists who contributed
to the original report formed the Science and Environmental Policy Project
(S&EPP). Led by Fred Singer, Atmospheric Physicist and Director, Science
and Environmental Policy at the University of Virginia,the S&EPP challenged
the 'unsupported assumption that catastrophic global warming follows from
the burning of fossil fuels and requires immediate action.' In a separate
action, an additional 46 prominent scientists and intellectuals in the
United States, including 27 Nobel Prize winners, joined 218 scientists
in other countries and presented what is called the Heidelberg Appeal to
the Heads of State Attending the Earth Summit. `This appeal states that
the global warming theory, ozone depletion theory, and other 'catastrophes'
paraded before the world are based on 'pseudo-science, irrational preconceptions,
and non-relevant data. Tragically, any scientist who disagrees with the
apocalypse machine is ignored. The worse offender in this stacking of the
deck is Vice President Gore (of the USA)." (End of quote). Have the newspapers
been "muzzled" by the environmentalists and their political NWO backers?
Yes indeed, as Dr. Coffman reveals: "Newsweeks Greg Easterbrook relates
in the July 6,1992, issue of the New Republic that, 'Gore and the distinguished
biologist Paul Ehrlich ( a top New Ager) have ventured into dangerous territory
by suggesting that journalists quietly self-censor environmental evidence
that is not alarming, because such reports, in Gore's words, 'undermine
the effort to build a solid basis of public support for the difficult actions
we must soon take.' So much for truth, integrity, and freedom of speech.
After all, what's a few trillion dollars to a career politician - even
if the policy is based in unsubstantiated theory when the overwhelming
facts say otherwise? After all, the American citizens will pay for it."
(End of quote, parenthesis added).
WHAT ABOUT THE TERROR OF GLOBAL WARMING?
One can understand fully why the citizens of earth will fall in with any
plan which will save them from the crisis of the dread "greenhouse effect"!
They have visions of disasters horrific, icecaps melting with civilizations
being wiped out along coastlines as the oceans overflow, extremely high
temperatures causing gigantic bush fires beyond imagination, no rain, no
water, everyone getting melanomas on their skins - a hell on earth! There
are a number of points of immense importance we should consider straight
away here: 1. ALL scientists do NOT agree that there is any catastrophic
greenhouse warming happening. The facts are startling, as pointed out on
page 39 of "Saviours of the Earth"; "Some environmental leaders and politicians
would have you believe that almost all scientists agree global warming
is occurring. Vice President Albert Gore asserts that 98 percent of all
atmospheric scientists agree that catastrophic greenhouse warming has begun.
THIS IS SIMPLY NOT TRUE. A February 1992 Gallup poll of climatologists
and atmospheric physicists yielded the conclusion that only SEVENTEEN PERCENT
of these scientists believed there was scientific evidence for greenhouse-caused
global warming." (Emphasis added). (The poll was taken within the members
of the American Geophysical Union and the American Meteorlogical Society.
from National Review, March 16 1992, 17.) 2. Therefore, a massive EIGHTY
THREE PERCENT of those scientists cited above actually believe that there
is NO EVIDENCE for greenhouse warming. A small sample only of the scientific
facts should go a long waytowards convincing the reader that something
"smells fishy" about this whole global warming fiasco. 3. We have been
told that the warmest global temperatures occurred in the 1980s. That is
true enough, but what they did not tell us was that 90 percent of the warming
during the past 100 years had already occurred by 1940:"In fact, the entire
100-year increase in temperature can be explained by a five-year increase
that took place between 1917 and 1921. But the increase was so benign that
nobody noticed it for sixty-five years. Although the biggest temperature
increases occurred during the first half of the twentieth century, the
big increases in carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases did not occur
until AFTER 1950." ("Saviours of the Earth", p. 40). (Robert Balling, The
Heated Debate: Greenhouse Predictions Versus Climate Reality (San Francisco:
Pacific Research Institute for Public Policy, 1992), 87. Patrick Michaels,
Sound and Fury (Washington, D.C.: CATO Institute, 1993. 55.63.) Most of
the warming had really happened BEFORE greenhouse gas emissions started
to accelerate! 4. From a scientist that should know, Patrick Michaels,
associate professor of environmental sciences at the University of Virginia
and past president of the American Association of State Climatologists,
he says: "Northern Hemisphere satellite data, like those for the Southern
Hemisphere, show no warming since the platforms were launched in 1979.
Morover, the very warm years of the 1980s, which are so evident in the
land-based record, simply do not appear in the satellite readings." (:
Ibid. 55.) Scientists have also shown that "extensive tree ring analyses
show the same result - no warming in the past twenty five years." ("Saviours
of the Earth", p.40. 5. A great exaggeration has accompanied the environmentalists'
forecasts about the climate, it seems. The climate models are not accurate,
indeed illogical. Looking at the past 100 years we should be able to test
this. The environmental climate models of the mid-80s predict that the
40 percent increase in greenhouse gases happening since the beginning of
this century should have caused a temperature rise of over 2 degrees C.
This hasn't happened, however. What is the increase in global temperature?
At the very worst, only 0.45 degrees C. (Michaels, Sound and Fury, p. 40).
6. Dr Coffman, using the findings of climatologist Patrick Michaels, and
the investigations of Thomas Karl, gives these comforting comments on current
trends: "They describe a pattern of cooler summers, warmer winters, and
longer growing seasons. OUR CLIMATE IS ACTUALLY GETTING BETTER....Rather
than being a disaster, increasing carbon dioxide has greater chance of
being a major boon to life on earth!" ("Saviours of the Earth?" p.43).
WHAT ABOUT THE SHOCK/HORROR "HOLE IN THE OZONE LAYER"?
This scare weapon of the New World Order is also a scam! 1. A note of interest
to begin with on the supposed increase in melanoma due to the hole in the
ozone layer causing the sun to burn in a harsher way. Studies done inour
own country of Australia have shown that indoor workers are more likely
to get melanoma than outdoor workers are! Possibly because UVA is not absorbed
by ozone, which Coffman tells us is implicated in causing melanoma. The
link has not been definitely establish however. [Dixy Lee Ray, Environmental
Overkill (Washington, D.C., Regnery Gate, 1993).41.)] 2. The first detection
of the ozone "hole at a pole" came in 1956-58. It was thinner then than
at any time since. The same problem for the environmentalists arises as
it did with the global warming fiasco. The first measurements of the pole
holes occurred BEFORE the so-called causes of these holes, (in this case
CFCs), even became a significant factor! 3. Amazingly ozone HOLES, according
to the experts, never actually form - "the ozone layer merely thins during
the time of maximum levels - in late winter and early spring (for each
hemisphere), and mostly at the polar regions. The little ozone thinning
that occurs at our temperate latitudes is most likely caused by the same
sulfate aerosols discussed above involved in global warming and acid rain."(Coffman,
"Saviours of the Earth?".p49. He cites the work of Michaels, Sound and
Fury, p.166) 4. There are not many people lying in the sun in early spring
when there is thinning, and another fact more telling than this is the
content of the so-called holes themselves. The ozone within the "holes"
in late winter is still actually thicker than the normal thickness of the
hemispheric summer period! WHAT ABOUT THOSE DESTRUCTIVE (chlorofluorocarbons)CFCs?
In a small presentation, which is only prepared to stimulate the reader
towards further study on the subject, the full weight of evidence cannot
be presented. The books cited therefore should be read by those who cannot
grasp the whole message herein, or who still have doubts about the veracity
of the statements. A brief summary can only be presented in a limited space,
with a few facts and figures. 1. The real culprits of the "holes at the
poles" which do not exist are natural phenomena. Things like earthquakes.NOT
CFCs! There is a natural thinning of ozone due to periodical natural occurrences,
such as earthquakes and volcanoes. 2. THE MONTREAL PROTOCOL. The international
agreement the Montreal Protocol, has been signed by many countries including
Australia. This agreement has made the banning of CFCs total by AD 2000,
even though there is no scientific evidence that CFCs cause ozone "holes".
3. The banning of CFCs is no light matter. There are no cost -effective
replacements for the CFCs. All replacements are either ten to thirty times
more costly than CFCs, and some are flammable, toxic and corrosive. This
means there will be immense hardship, even deaths, caused by the banning
of CFCs. Even the eco-terrorists that are demanding the banning know this
to be fact. 4. In only four years time, at the writing of this booklet,
all the refrigerators, freezers, air conditioners, millions of these, will
be scrapped in Australia, and other nations. All this because of a document
of 300 pages which gives "new findings" on the ozone depletion. A document
that supported the drastic action of the Montreal Protocol, and which has
been mysteriously "lost"! Yes, "lost"! The report cannot be "found" to
be verified by other scientists. So that we have facing us a situation
which must change our lives for the worse, far worse, the TOTAL banning
of CFCs by AD 2000, and the drastic action is only based on "garbage science".
Strange indeed. 5. From "The New Citizen", Vol.2,No.1. Sept/Oct/Nov.Edition.
"Another environmental hoax - the claim that CFC refrigerants (the chlorofluorocarbons)
are destroying the Earth's ozone layer - was recently denounced by Lewis
du Pont Smith, an heir to the du Pont fortune. On the occasion of the du
Pont Company board meeting early this year, Smith charged the corporation,
now controlled by the Bronfman family of Canada, is furthering the hoax
because it has a corner on the market for the CFCs' replacement; he also
charged that millions will die, especially in the Third World, if CFC is
banned from use in refrigerating food and medicine."
A STRANGE TWIST COMES INTO THE PICTURE!
From "Inside News" July/August, 1989: "Once the Conrad Black - Kerry
Packer takeover is completed, and somewhere down the track Murdock goes
broke, these are the people who will really be running things downunder,
[the writer refers to a company called Brascan previously], and responsible
for most of what you and your children see, hear, and think, so listen
carefully to the names. The Chairman of Brascan is Peter Bronfman, a relative
of Edgar Bronfman, who is also on the board at Brascan. Edgar Bronfman
is the man who single handedly financed the Ozone Hole scam, so that through
his control of DuPont Chemicals he could have a world-wide monopoly on
refrigeration. Edgar Bronfman is also, just incidentally, the president
of the World Jewish Congress, and Brascan is the Rothschild family's principal
control company on the American continent. Conrad B lack is also on the
board, as is Nelson Rockefeller, John L. Mcloy, the Rockefeller family
lawyer. Also on the board is Lewis L. Strauss, of Kuhn Loeb and Co." (The
article was about the Australia media, but for our purposes here we have
dealt only with CFCs).
HOW WILL THE WORLD SURVIVE?
We cannot imagine the real state of affairs if CFCs are banned. A huge
tragedy will be forced upon the inhabitants of the planet, and remember
that the New World Order intends to "shrink the population" by approx.
3 billion by the new millennium. Could this CFCs banning be a part of this
unbelievable population culling process? It certainly seems to be. In Australia
we would suffer enormously, especially those who live in the northern states.
Our temperatures often exceed 30-35 degrees C, sometimes into the 40s.
There will be no air conditioners as we know them, in hospitals, homes,
offices, colleges or schools. There will be no refrigeration as we know
it today. There will be food spoilage, heat stress for the ill, the very
young and the elderly. ( More on the scam population explosion further
on in this article) The cost of replacing our lost refrigeration is so
staggering that it is unthinkable! It is estimated that replacing the refrigerants
alone in the USA would cost the country $10 to $30 billion, but it will
increase by fivefold by the year 2000, so the cost then would be $50 to
$150 BILLION. We would all be up for huge increases paying for higher costs
in foods, due to the higher costs of the replacement refrigeration. Just
replacing our private refrigeration and air conditioners, paying for public
replacements etc, would be as high as $10,000 per Australian family. "Engineers
expect compressors on refrigerators to last only three years. The ban will
cost Americans hundreds of billions, perhaps trillions, of dollars for
a much inferior product." (Coffman).
IS THERE ANY PREDICTIONS OF ACTUAL DEATHS DUE TO CFCs BANNING?
Robert Watson, who is the head of the Ozone Trends Panel, and strongly
supports the banning of CFCs, has admitted that there is, and I quote,
"probably more people would die from food poisoning as a consequence of
inadequate refrigeration than would die from depleting ozone." ("Press
Release: Ozone Hole," editorial in the Wall Street Journal, February 28,
THE UNDERSTATEMENT OF THE CENTURY?
This quote from Coffman is quite chilling: "Watson's prediction may turn
out to be the understatment of the century. Due to the severe impact of
losing CFCs on the refrigerated food transportation and storage industry,
some estimates suggest that 20 -40 million people will die yearly world-wide
from hunger, starvation, and food-borne diseases. Even if these estimates
prove to be high, America appears to be bent on taking a giant step into
the twilight zone - at a horrible cost in human tragedy." (Ibid p.52).
(Cited for figures was Ray, Environmental Overkill, 49).
A FALSE VIEW.
Here in Australia we have vast amounts of tax-payers' money being spent
on "ecology" protection initiatives. Most citizens look on with vague approval,
seeing no sinister side to the whole "greenie" hype, rather they are glad
in a way that someone else is handling what they do not want to tackle.
The view they have is limited, frighteningly so! The picture most Australians
have of the environmental leader is a dedicated (perhaps extreme?) person
who has such high principles that he/she simply moves bravely ahead, seeking
to save the forests, oceans, rivers and animals from the hands of Western
materialism and multinationals. They see the "greenies" as people who have
little money, but depend heavily on donations, fighting greedy corporations
who are very rich. They are caring people, despite being rather militant
sometimes. The reality is that this is a false image.
THE MYTH OF THE "GREENIE" LEADER.
"This image of environmental leadership is a myth of almost unbelievable
proportions - a myth perpetrated and maintained by a well-oiled and extremely
well-financed propaganda machine of the environmental organizations themselves,
along with a little help from the media. In fact, environmental leadership
generally outmans, outspends, and outguns their opposition many times over.
The level of funding at the fingertips of these leaders has to be huge
for them to conduct their activities across such a broad front: the agricultural
industry, the forest products and paper industry, the commercial fishing
industry, the chemical industry, the automobile' trucking industry, the
solid waste disposal industry (they don't want to find solutions), and
even golf course industry. In fact,...they are against any individual who
violates their nature-is-god, biocentric view of reality." ("Saviours of
the Earth?", p.99).
HORROR STORIES ABOUND.
The horror stories of the suffering caused by the environmentalists to
ordinary citizens, companies, logging employees, and entire nations, abound.
Australia itself is becoming a suffering country due to the eco-terrorism.
It is difficult to get access to the stories of the average person's plight,
in Australian terms, the following are related from the USA, and Australian.
THE WETLANDS ECO-GESTAPO.
John Pozsgai was unable to understand what was happening to him. He was
an immmigrant from Hungary, who had suffered under the Nazi Gestapo and
Communism. He felt that America was a free country. But now, just because
he had cleaned up some junk on a dump and had started to build a garage,
he was jailed, and had lost all his life savings. It was just like Hitler
and Stalin! In 1991 Pozgai bought a fourteen acre block of land so that
he could expand his small business. It had been used as a dump for twenty
years, and was covered in old tyres and rusty old car parts, so he had
to clean it up. He was going to replace the junk with clean dirt and gravel.
He was told he needed a permit by state officials, which he got. It wasn't
a marsh or a swamp. The creek adjacent to the cleanup was mostly dry, and
skunk cabbage and sweet gum trees were there. Because the land had these,
the land fell under the WETLANDS JURISDICTION definition. The EPA (Environmental
Protection Agency) slapped a restraining order on Pozgai to prevent any
deposit of fill. Pozgai tried to comply by putting up barriers to stop
the fill dumping going on. Sadly, Pozgai did not camp out on the block
to ensure that all understood about the restrain, and several contractors
drove around the barricades and dumped fill, as they had contracted to
do. The EPA video- taped this, and disaster struck Pozgai! He was accused
of violating the "Navigable Waters" provision of the Clean Waters Act.
What happened? Pozgai was fined $202,000 and sentenced to three years in
prison. He also had to restore the dump land to its pristine, natural state,
which it hadn't been in for twenty years or more.
A man on the Sunshine Coast, Queensland, felt his view was interrupted
by the native trees on the foreshore in front of his beach house. He cut
down a few of the trees. This was admittedly rather presumption on his
part. to say the least. However, the environmental clamour that has arisen
is "overkill". The guilty party is facing fines which have been suggested
as being a quarter of a million dollars, he has to replace all the trees
at the original full-size level. An immensely costly procedure. The man
will be ruined most likely by the time this is over. What if he cannot
FROM THE USA.
Ron Stevens, who lives in Memphis, Tennessee, owns an electrical shop.
In 1987 he received a bill from EPA for $250,000 to clean up a Superfund
site in Cape Giradeau, Missouri. He knew nothing of this matter at all!
Why did he get the bill? We shall see! Ron got the bill for one quarter
of a million dollars because he sold used transformers in 1977 to a parts
distributor in St Louis for $250. Some of these transformers ended up in
the Missouri Electrical Works in Cape Girardeau, which later become a Superfund
site.* (A Superfund toxic waste site is an area that falls under the Comprehensive
Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act of 1980. Designed
to clean up large hazardous waste dumps or spills.) That older style transformer
contained oil with some PCBs, which can harm wildlife. According to the
Superfund rules, even if a party had only contributed in a small way to
the waste dumping, they could be held responsible to clean up the mess.
Even to have to pay for the entire cleanup. Ron had to pay $250,000, or
face a lawsuit which could have cost him millions! (Ron had done nothing
illegal at all, initially. Nor had he even known of the site which he had
to pay to clean up!)
The small businesses which specialize in spray painting and panel-beating
cars had a nasty blow delivered to them. This happened in the Brisbane
area of Queensland. They were told by the council, under new environmental
laws, that they could no longer spray the cars in the old way, or finish
the final step in the bogging process by washing down the car with the
hose. Why? They were polluting the earth by letting the water run off the
cars into the soil, and they were polluting the atmosphere by spraying
the cars with paint. The new laws stated that the business owners must
construct spraying booths to catch any paint floating in the air. The water
running off the cars had to be caught in special water traps, which would
then be collected by contractors for removal and re-cycling, which the
small businesses, of course, would have to pay for. The whole affair was
too costly for the majority, and they had no choice but to close up. Thus
getting rid of older cars?
MANY PIES HAVE THE ENVIRONMENTAL FINGER IN THEM!
The extent of the ecology war being waged against the planet should never
be under estimated. Incidences could be told which are hair-raising.
"Many people can remember photos of the ghostly death of entire forests
in Europe and the eastern United States. Bearing a silent testimony to
the insensitivity of man, these forests were supposedly killed by that
deadly chemical soup, acid rain. People still envision acid-scorched leaves,
dissolving buildings, and tumor-ridden fish when they think of acid rain.
people find it hard to believe that acid rain is not the disaster environmental
leaders have made it out to be. Like the DDT "catastrophe," however, pseudoscience,
hysteria, and emotion prevailed over science."(Coffman, p.37). It is not,
it seems, that science has shown that acid rain does not cause damage,
but rather that there has been an enormous distortion of what had been
shown by science to be a "manageable problem". Science has revealed that
acid rain caused only marginal damage to some lakes and streams, and did
not cause the damage to forests to the extent that it was claimed. An example:
less than .01 percent of all the USA eastern forests were damaged by acid
rain, and those damaged were located on very high mountains. "Intensive
[research] has not supported initial concerns that North American forests
are suffering widespread damage caused by acidic deposition. Most forests
are apparently healthy. Known forest health problems are in most cases
attributable to natural stresses and/or past land management practices.
With the possible and notable exception of high-elevation red spruce in
the northern Appalachians, acidic deposition has not been shown to be a
significant factor contributing to current forest health problems in North
America."* (Joseph Barnard, "Changes in Forest Health and Productivity
in the United States and Canada." Acidic Deposition: State of Science and
Technology Report 16. Nation Acid Precipitation Assessment Program,158.)
*It is a documented fact that the reduction of the automobile size and
its strength causes 2,000 to 4,000 deaths every year in the USA. All to
meet tighter fuel standards.
*The definitions of "wetlands" can actually mean that owners of dry lands
can be and are being prosecuted for "wetlands destruction".
*Although the environmentalists insist that forests are decreasing, thus
causing dangers to the atmosphere of the planet, in the USA the opposite
is the truth. Forest growth exceeds harvest by 37 percent.
* DDT has been permanently banned because of false information. DDT helped
control typhus, malaria, yellow fever, and sleeping sickness.
WE HAVE BEEN SOLD A BILL OF GOODS! ABOUT A MOUNTAIN OF ECOLOGY MATTERS!
Have the environmentalists made a dramatic, dangerous impact on our own
society? The impact has been increasing over the years, leading up to the
last years of this millennium, when the political pressures are being brought
into "big gun" status! Consider the following initiatives here in Australia,
as a mere example. 1. ANCA - Australian Nature Conservation Agency. In
1993 published the First Edition of The Directory of Important Wetlands
in Australia. A culmination of a three year cooperative project involving
all State and Territory Governments. This First Edition described 520 nationally
important wetland areas with a total of nearly 13 million hectares. Australia
is the host for the Ramsar Convention Conference in Brisbane. 2. THE RAMSAR
SITES. These are wetland sites of International Importance. The National
Wetlands Program has been allocated $3.1m for activities over the next
four years. Ramsar is an inter-governmental conference held every three
years. Its organization will be a joint effort between the Federal and
Queensland Governments, the Brisbane City Council and a coalition of non-government
groups and the Australian Wetlands Alliance. All this is wetlands based.
Remember, that "wetlands" description can involve dry lands as well. A
property, even a town, may not even have to be wet, or even slightly damp,
to be designated a wetland. In the USA almost anything can qualify as a
wetland, as long as two of these criteria are met: (a). The soil was classified
as being "hydric", that is having characteristics of being saturated with
water for long periods. (b). The water table reached within eighteen inches
of the surface for as little as seven days during the growing season. (c).
Hydrophilic (water loving/tolerant) vegetation was present. (Land Rights
letter 3, nos.1,2 (1993),5) In the USA a horror tale related about a man
called William Ellen should cause us to reflect seriously indeed on these
"wetland" initiatives: For what was called a "premeditated environmental
crime" by Jane F.Barrett, Ass. US Attorney, who helped prosecute Ellen,
the prosecution asked for a jail term of 27-33 months. The time an average
convicted person spends in jail in the US is 6.4 days; for robbery, 23
days; for rape 60 days; and for murder, 18 months! Ellen ended up with
six months in prison, an additional four months in home detention and one
year of supervised release.
WHAT WAS THE CRIME OF ELLEN?
A rather complicated case, of amazingly foolish charges, it can be basically
summed up thus - he dumped two loads of dirt! The land had never seen a
drop of surface water, but it was deemed to be a crime of "filling a wetlands."
A revision of the definition of wetlands had quietly been accomplished
without Ellen's knowledge. Ellen was accused of "filling" five wetlands
totalling 86 acres. Three of these counts were for mistakes that had occurred
a full year before. 3. ANZECC WETLANDS NETWORK. ANZECC is The Australian
and New Zealand Environmental and Conservation Council which consists of
the Federal Environmental Ministers of Australia and New Zealand plus the
corresponding Minister from each Australian State and Territory. It encompasses
different agencies such as: Federal agencies and commissions; Parks and
conservation; heritage and natural resource departments; national parks
etc; wildlife. 4. THE ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION ACT. EPA, AUSTRALIA. The
EPA 1994 affects us all. The Act has 241 sections in eight chapters. It
is to do with LOCAL CONTROL; NEW RESPONSIBILITIES; "ENVIRONMENTAL DUTY";
and PROTECTION POLICIES. "For the first time in Queensland law, each person
is bound by a general 'environmental duty'." (Material from the Queensland
Department of Environmental and Heritage). OFFENCES? The department states
that "polluting the air, land or water is an offence." The penalties "range
from $60 to $600 on-the-stop fines for "minor" infringements, and up to
$250,000 for "someone who deliberately causes serious pollution." This
is defined in the Act as "harm which costs more than $50,000 to fix." Which
could mean anything in practical situations. "Serious or deliberate offences
also carry JAIL SENTENCES." (My emphasis).
Be not deceived, Greenpeace is eco-terrorism in action! Who are these people?
Like many of the "save the earth" greenie groups, Greenpeace is a New Age
association, networking with many, many others. These are basically all
controlled by the Theosphists, with "deep ecology" beliefs prevalent throughout.
There are thousands and thousands of these groups which network together,
in order to bring forth the Aquarian Age, the New Age New World Order.
Countless groups which seek 'peace', to 'save the earth', implement the
New Age 'Plan' and bring the new culture to the globe. This short list
can give the reader a realisation of the enormity of the New Age networks,
amongst them being Greenpeace. Arcane school, Esalen Institute, Club of
Rome, Institute of Noetic Sciences, Planetary Initiative, Theosphical Society,
World Goodwill, Findhorn Foundation, Tara Centre, Windstar, New Group of
World Servers, Lucis Trust, Perelandra, Planetary Citizens, Sierra Club,
Association for Transpersonal Psychology, Hunger Project, Astara, Chinook
Learning Center, Sirius Community - many, many more. Thousands more.
The Planetary Citizens was created by the former Ass.Sec.Gen.to the United
Nations, Robert Muller, and the United Nations consultant Donald Keys,
at the direction of the then Secretary General of the UN U- Thant.
THE RELIGIOUS BELIEFS OF THE ENVIRONMENTALISTS.
Many average people who support the environmentalists have no idea that
the whole movement has a dark religious thrust to it. Leaders in the environmental
groups, on a local level, may not understand this themselves. Theosophy
has enormous power in the world of the 1990s, this in itself is a supernatural,
and astonishing, situation. Too complex to attempt in anything but a brief
outline here, the grasp of the Theosphical beliefs will help the reader
to understand the environmental movement and globalism today. 1. GAIA,
the Mother Earth or Goddess, is the earth hypothesis which undergirds the
environmental groups.The earth is called Gaia after an ancient Greek goddess,
and is seen as a living entity who "feels" "thinks" "rules" "commands"
and "loves" - and destroys those who would pollute her!. She is more important
than humans, who are mere germs on her skin. 2. Nature is God, and God
is nature is a theological doctrine of theosophy. Helena Blavatsky was
the founder of the Theosphical Society late last century. Another name
which is of importance in the movement is Alice Bailey. These following
quotes will help clarify the situation: "[Theosophy] belongs neither to
the Hindu, the Zoastrian, Chaldean, nor the Egyptian religion, neither
to Buddhism, Islam, Judaism nor Christianity exclusively. The Secret Doctrine
[of Theosophy] is the essence of all these." (Helena Blavatsky, The Secret
Doctrine.) "SATAN will now be shown in the teaching of the Secret Doctrine
[of Theosophy], allegorised as Good, and Sacrifice, a God of Wisdom, under
different names." (Emphasis mine.) The Secret Doctrine. Helena Blavatsky.
"Interference by man in this civilisation can disrupt the life forces of
nature and the occult. Only in countries where there is no civilisation
can the power of nature be found - the world's soul." (Helena Blavatsky.
Isis Unveiled, Vol. 2:210-11.)
ARE YOU AND YOUR FAMILY EXPENDABLE? ARE THERE MURDEROUS INTENTIONS BEING
DIRECTED AGAINST US ALL?
The New Age deep ecology beliefs dominate the environmental movement. David
Garber, research biologist, says this: "Human happiness, and certainly
human fecundity, are not as important as a wild and healthy planet. I know
social scientists who remind me that people are a part of nature, but that
isn't true. Somewhere along the line - at about a million years ago, maybe
half that - we quit the contract and became a cancer. we have become a
plague upon ourselves and upon the Earth....Until such time as Homo Sapiens
should decide to rejoin nature, some of us can only hope for the right
virus to come along." (Quoted from Robert Bidinotto, "Environmentalism:Freedom's
Foe for the '90s," The Freeman, Nov.1990,414. Requoted in "Savior's of
the Earth?", p.92.) "Humans are a cancer to the earth - even those native
cultures of a few thousand years ago. The only solution is to eliminate
man! Or at least to reduce man's population to somewhere around 500 million
from the 5.5 billion that exist today. The more radical groups such as
EARTH FIRST!, SEA SHEPHERD, and GREENPEACE, ascribe to these beliefs, which
helps to explain their extreme militancy. David Foreman, founder of Earth
First! puts this rather succinctly: "We are a BIOCENTRIC WARRIOR SOCIETY....Forget
about career, about family, about VCRs and power boats and get out and
fight!" (Emphasis added. Coffman, p.93. Quoted from The Animal's Agenda,
TO PONDER UPON, PRAY ABOUT AND SEEK GUIDANCE FROM GOD.
Already we in Australia have seen on our own televisions scenes of farmers
and their families being victimized over some environmental issue or other.
We have seen timber mills closed, ordinary citizens in distress over some
incident or other to do with the environment, things could get very much
worse. Be careful before condemning some poor family for their "callous"
treatment of nature or animals. Families are being destroyed by the eco-terrorists
of this world! The environmental movement which appears to be in isolation
from the power barons of the planet, is not standing alone, it is an integral
part of a global agenda. The religion that says that nature is God is a
global one, with a future of tyranny already planned for the earth's masses.
This religion will inevitably regress the civilization of the earth back
thousands of years, and bring black poverty and suffering to billions.
(If they survive that long!) Esoteric religion has wrought, with its catastrophe,
"holes in poles", "destroy the refrigerator" scams, "the earth is a pressure-cooker"
hysteria, a huge deception upon mankind! This could well lead the godless
world into the Tribulation period of Biblical Prophecy (Revelation 6-19).
Time is short!
MORE ON THE MONTREAL PROTOCOL.
March 1988, NASA's Ozone Trends Panel declared that the ozone layer had
been depleted, and it was as bad as 2 to 3 percent! Comments Dr Coffman:
"Putting this in perspective, a 2 percent reduction is equivalent to the
natural decline in the ozone thickness from Boston to Washington, D.C.,
or between Portland, regon, Sacramento, California! If 2 to 3 percent reduction
is important, then those Americans who live in the South are already in
big trouble! Somehow these qualifiers were overlooked, and the press release
sent shock waves throughout the world. Calls were made to ban CFCs." (P.
50. "Saviours of the Earth.") And so in 1990 the international agreement
named the Montreal Protocol was revised. It was then signed by the USA
and many other nations, including eventually Australia. The world was set
to ban completely the use of CFCs by the year 2000. The Deputy Assistant
of State for Environment in the USA, Richard Benedick, was the USA negotiator
in that treaty. This is, amazingly, what Benedick said: "The most extraordinary
aspect of the treaty was its imposition of short-term economic costs to
protect human health and the environment against unprove future dangers...dangers
that rested on scientific theories, rather than on firm data. At the time
of the negotiations and signing, no measurable evidence of damage existed....By
their action, the signatory countries sounded the death knell for an important
part of the international chemical industry, with implications for billions
of dollars in investment and hundreds of thousands of jobs in related sectors."
(Richard Benedick, Ozone Diplomacy (Cambridge:Harvard Univ.,1991),190;
as quoted in Dixy Lee Ray, Environmental Overkill, 46.)
Click here for completion
of this document....